Youth and Young Adult-targeted E-cigarette Warnings and Advertising Messages: An Experiment with Young Adults in the US.

Warnings specifically focused on harm to younger users have been understudied in vaping warning research, even while vaping products may appeal specifically to a younger population through implicit advertising strategies. This study examined how youth and young adult-focused e-cigarette health warning messages and implicit advertising strategies influence affective responses, risk perceptions, cognitive elaboration about e-cigarette harms, and willingness to vape in the future. We recruited young adults (who, at the time, were not smoking combustible cigarettes) aged 18-25 to participate in an online survey experiment with a 3 (warning label type: current FDA/youth and young adult risk-focused/none) × 3 (advertising health message strategy: explicit/implicit/none) + 3 (non-vaping products control) design. The results show a main effect for warning such that both FDA and targeted warnings increased negative affect and decreased positive affect compared to no warning. Moreover, the youth and young adult-focused warning boosted youth-specific harm beliefs and cognitive elaboration relative to control and the FDA warning, which did not differ from one another. Implicit health messages produced greater positive affect relative to explicit messages and no message, but the ad strategy manipulations did not influence other outcomes. While the population studied here with a single exposure reported no effects of either manipulation on willingness to vape, previous research has associated similar emotions and cognitions with lowered intentions to vape. Regulatory bodies should consider further exploration of vaping warnings that emphasize youth and young adult-specific harms to educate young people about relevant risks.

Should Graphic Warning Labels Proposed for Cigarette Packages Sold in the United States Mention the Food and Drug Administration?

INTRODUCTION: Under the US Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has the authority to implement graphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette packages. Neither the original labels proposed by the FDA nor the revised labels include a source to indicate sponsorship of the warnings. This study tests the potential impact of adding a sponsor to the content of GWLs. METHODS: We recruited adult smokers (N = 245) and middle-school youth (N = 242) from low-income areas in the Northeastern US. We randomly assigned participants to view one of three versions of the original FDA-proposed warning labels in a between-subjects experiment: no sponsor, "US Food and Drug Administration," or "American Cancer Society" sponsor. We tested the effect of varying sponsorship on source attribution and source credibility. RESULTS: Compared to unsponsored labels, FDA sponsorship increased source attributions that the FDA sponsored the labels among both middle-school, largely nonsmoking youth and adult smokers. However, sponsorship had no effect on source credibility among either population. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that adding FDA as the source is likely to boost source credibility judgments, at least in the short term; though doing so would not appear to have adverse effects on credibility judgments. As such, our data are largely consistent with the Tobacco Control Act's provisions that allow, but do not require, FDA sponsorship on the labels. IMPLICATIONS: This study addresses the FDA's regulatory efforts by informing the possible design and content of future cigarette warning labels. Our results do not offer compelling evidence that adding the FDA name on GWLs will directly increase source credibility. Future work may test more explicit FDA source labeling and continue to examine the credibility of tobacco message content among high-priority populations.

Testing the Effects of Certain versus Hypothetical Language in Health Risk Messages.

This paper tests how the certainty or hypotheticality conveyed through language can be harnessed to enhance the effectiveness of targeted messaging about health risks. We conducted two experiments with adult smokers (n = 317) and middle school youth (n = 321) from low-income communities in the context of pictorial cigarette warning labels. We manipulated hypotheticality of risk through verb modality: 1. non-modal (present tense, e.g., smoking causes cancer), and modal/hypothetical (2. may, 3. can, and 4. will). For adult smokers, definitive (present tense) wording led to greater health risk beliefs, compared to hypothetical wording, among adult males but not females. For youth, contrary to what might seem intuitive, the more hypothetical may verb modality was more effective than the present tense language in promoting health risk beliefs. Among youth, greater health risk beliefs were also associated with reduced susceptibility to use cigarettes. No differences in negative affect by hypotheticality of language were found for either population. We discuss these findings in relation to the theoretical implications for the concept of hypotheticality and the application of construal level theory to strategic health communication.

Effects of Varying Color, Imagery, and Text of Cigarette Package Warning Labels among Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Middle School Youth and Adult Smokers.

The U.S. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) of 2009 paved the way for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to propose nine different graphic warning labels (GWLs) intended for prominent placement on the front and back of cigarette packs and on cigarette advertisements. Those GWLs were adjudicated as unconstitutional on the ground that they unnecessarily infringed tobacco companies' free speech without sufficiently advancing the government's public health interests. This study examines whether less extensive alternatives to the original full-color GWLs, including black-and-white GWLs and text-only options, have similar or divergent effects on visual attention, negative affect, and health risk beliefs. We used a mobile media research lab to conduct a randomized experiment with two populations residing in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities: biochemically confirmed adult smokers (N = 313) and middle school youth (N = 340). Results indicate that full-color GWLs capture attention for longer than black-and-white GWLs among both youth and adult smokers. Among adults, packages with GWLs (in either color or black-and-white) engendered more negative affect than those with text-only labels, while text-only produced greater negative affect than the packages with brand imagery only. Among youth, GWLs and text-only labels produced comparable levels of negative affect, albeit more so than brand imagery. We thus offer mixed findings related to the claim that a less extensive alternative could satisfy the government's compelling public health interest to reduce cigarette smoking rates.

Effects of 30% and 50% Cigarette Pack Graphic Warning Labels on Visual Attention, Negative Affect, Quit Intentions, and Smoking Susceptibility among Disadvantaged Populations in the United States.

Introduction: Though the WHO Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC) calls for the implementation of large graphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette boxes, the courts have blocked the implementation of 50% labels in the United States. We conducted an experiment to explore whether changing the size of GWLs is associated with changes in visual attention, negative affect, risk beliefs, and behavioral intentions. Method: We recruited adult smokers (N = 238) and middle-school youth (N = 237) throughout the state of New York in May 2016. We randomly assigned participants to one of three between-subject conditions (no GWL [control], 30% GWL, 50% GWL). Results: Adult and youth participants looked at the GWLs longer when the GWL covered 50% versus 30% of the pack's front. Increasing GWL size from 30% to 50% did not influence negative affect or risk beliefs, though both GWL sizes increased negative affect relative to the no-GWL control group. Exposure to 50% GWLs increased adult smokers' intentions to quit compared to no-GWL, but smokers exposed to 30% GWLs did not differ from control. There were no differences between 50% GWLs, 30% GWLs, and control on youth smoking susceptibility. Conclusions: Findings provide some evidence of the benefits of a 50% versus 30% GWL covering the front of the pack for adult smokers and at-risk youth from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds-though not on all outcomes. Implications: This research shows that 30% GWLs on cigarette packages increase negative affect relative to packages without front-of-package GWLs. Larger GWLs on cigarette packages (50% vs. 30%) increase visual attention to the warning and its pictorial content among low-SES smokers and at-risk youth but do not further increase negative affect. A 50% GWL increased adults' quit intention compared to no GWL at all, but we were underpowered to detect modest differences in quit intentions between a 50% and 30% GWL. Future work should thus continue to explore the boundary conditions under which relatively larger GWLs influence cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes.

The unintended consequences of disclosure: effect of manipulating sponsor identification on the perceived credibility and effectiveness of smoking cessation advertisements.

One reason that tobacco-sponsored smoking cessation ads are less effective than those sponsored by public health agencies may be that the persuasive arguments in tobacco-sponsored ads are inherently weaker than arguments made in public health ads. An alternate explanation is that sponsorship disclosure on the face of the ad activates resistance, partly because of credibility judgments directed toward tobacco companies. The authors test hypotheses in a 3 (sponsor identification) × 2 (ad content) randomized factorial experiment (N = 270). Results indicate that judgments of sponsor credibility play a mediating role in perceptions of ad effectiveness, with identification of a tobacco company as the sponsor of cessation ads undermining perceived credibility compared with the same ads without the tobacco company identified. However, the reduction in credibility resulting from tobacco sponsorship can be partially overcome when the sponsor is placed on more direct ad content (public health ads). The effects of credibility on perceived effectiveness were stronger for more ambiguous ad content and driven by participants with lower levels of involvement (nonsmokers). Credibility judgments are not as important when the ad content is more direct about the health consequences of smoking. Implications of study results for theory and public policy are explored.

Challenges in communicating the benefits of switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes: Responses from eight adult focus groups with varying smoking experience.

This study explored the effectiveness of nuanced messages, described in our study as warnings, that seek to convey the potential benefits of switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes for adults. The messages were designed to convey the potentially complex idea that e-cigarettes are likely less harmful than combustible cigarettes but that e-cigarettes still present a risk. Eight adult focus groups (N = 37) with varying smoking profiles responded to a set of messages that are used by government agencies and non-government organizations to convey the benefits of switching and ongoing risk associated with e-cigarette use. Results indicate that a suggestion of health benefits from exclusive use of e-cigarettes was met with skepticism from users of e-cigarettes and combustible cigarettes, and generated confusion about what these benefits were. Messages suggesting that individuals who have switched to e-cigarettes should not switch back to combustible cigarettes elicited the strongest statements of doubt and mistrust among focus group participants, regardless of smoking status. Participants representing all smoking profiles agreed with the message suggesting that switching from combustible cigarettes to e-cigarettes still exposes the user to ongoing health risks. Our focus group discussions suggest that adult smokers may not interpret nuanced messages about harm reduction in a way that will encourage switching behavior.

Independent or synergistic? Effects of varying size and using pictorial images in tobacco health warning labels.

INTRODUCTION: Legal challenges have blocked the implementation of large, pictorial health warning labels (HWLs) in the U.S. In light of future legal questions the U.S. Food and Drug Administration may face in proposing alternative HWLs, we examined whether less restrictive HWL versions on the front of packs-smaller HWLs and/or text-only HWLs that do not include pictorial imagery-may be sufficient to promote cognitive and affective outcomes associated with smoking cessation. METHODS: We recruited low-income smokers in two separate experiments through field-based recruitment methods (Study 1, N = 497) or Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) (Study 2, N = 495). In both studies, we randomly assigned participants to a no-HWL control condition or one of four HWL conditions in a 2 (pictorial vs. text-only) × 2 (50% vs. 30% size) between-subjects design. RESULTS: Relative to text-only HWLs, pictorial HWLs increased negative affect but not risk belief acceptance, cognitive elaboration about smoking harms, or quit intentions. The 50% HWLs increased quit intentions relative to the control condition in both studies. The 50% HWLs also outperformed the 30% HWLs in promoting quit intentions in Study 2. Subsequent analyses revealed that this effect in Study 2 may have been driven by the 50% HWLs strengthening the relationship between risk-related thoughts and intentions, although there was no evidence for this pattern in Study 1. We found no evidence for interaction effects between the pictorial and size manipulations. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that 50% HWLs, whether pictorial or text-only, can encourage low-income smokers to consider quitting under some conditions.

Testing competing explanations for graphic warning label effects among adult smokers and non-smoking youth.

RATIONALE: The United States courts have blocked the implementation of graphic warning labels on cigarette packages (GWLs). This decision was based, in part, on the premise that GWLs are unnecessarily emotional and are meant to scare rather than inform consumers about smoking's health effects. However, research in judgment and decision-making suggests these relationships are more complex. OBJECTIVE: In this article, we draw on several theoretical frameworks that lead to competing hypotheses about the relationships between negative affect, health risk beliefs, and quit intentions (among adult smokers) or susceptibility to start smoking (among non-smoking youth). METHOD: We tested these competing mediation models using data from two experiments with two populations each-adult smokers (Ns = 313 and 238) and primarily non-smoking middle-school youth (Ns = 340 and 237). Using mobile recruitment methods, we focused specifically on individuals from socioeconomically disadvantaged communities in rural and urban areas of the Northeastern United States. RESULTS: The best fitting model across all four datasets was one in which label-induced negative affect (a) directly predicted intentions/susceptibility but also (b) indirectly predicted intentions/susceptibility via risk beliefs. Although mediation analyses did not demonstrate significant serial mediation effects of label exposure on intentions/susceptibility through negative affect then risk beliefs, there was some evidence that label exposure indirectly promoted adults' quit intentions through negative affect. Additionally, negative affect consistently mediated the indirect effect of label exposure on strengthened risk beliefs among adults and youth. CONCLUSIONS: These results speak to the importance of negative affect in directly motivating adult smokers' quit intentions but also serving an informational function, directing adult smokers and non-smoking youth to accept the health risks of smoking.

Accounting for misclassification error in retrospective smoking data.

Recent waves of major longitudinal surveys in the US and other countries include retrospective questions about the timing of smoking initiation and cessation, creating a potentially important but under-utilized source of information on smoking behavior over the life course. In this paper, we explore the extent of, consequences of, and possible solutions to misclassification errors in models of smoking participation that use data generated from retrospective reports. In our empirical work, we exploit the fact that the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 provides both contemporaneous and retrospective information about smoking status in certain years. We compare the results from four sets of models of smoking participation. The first set of results are from baseline probit models of smoking participation from contemporaneously reported information. The second set of results are from models that are identical except that the dependent variable is based on retrospective information. The last two sets of results are from models that take a parametric approach to account for a simple form of misclassification error. Our preliminary results suggest that accounting for misclassification error is important. However, the adjusted maximum likelihood estimation approach to account for misclassification does not always perform as expected.